AE AE 2021 Bigfooty NFL Tipping Comp

[Exe Gesis]

Your problem is you try and get too cute. Try to be a genius picking too many outsiders rather than going with the obvious.

You start the season well, then you quickly go into a tail spin after one bad week trying to catch up too quick instead of chipping away. Its the same scenario almost every season

I dont try to be a genius, my angle is that there are always some upsets every week, always some kind of system where home team beats away team something like 9-7 to 11-5, and try to fit my picks into those two models. Which ones are the upsets, which 9-11 teams are the home winners? Then, true, when i start falling behind, i go too aggressive trying to pick stranger upsets in terms of "how to bridge the gap quicker".

I tend to do better when i just stick with the gut instinct and dont try to manufacture selections based on models and methods.

One year i swear, i will ONLY use the method of taking all the Vegas favorites. I remember a year where the winner of AE admitted to following that method and they couldnt be caught all season. I just find that kind of hard to do, to resist picking from my own mind.

 

[A11dAtP0w3R]

I dont try to be a genius, my angle is that there are always some upsets every week, always some kind of system where home team beats away team something like 9-7 to 11-5, and try to fit my picks into those two models. Which ones are the upsets, which 9-11 teams are the home winners? Then, true, when i start falling behind, i go too aggressive trying to pick stranger upsets in terms of "how to bridge the gap quicker".

I tend to do better when i just stick with the gut instinct and dont try to manufacture selections based on models and methods.

One year i swear, i will ONLY use the method of taking all the Vegas favorites. I remember a year where the winner of AE admitted to following that method and they couldnt be caught all season. I just find that kind of hard to do, to resist picking from my own mind.

You dont have to pick favs every week. Just dont pick 10+ point underdogs as often as you do to win.

A good way I find when I give a big underdog a chance of winning is still take the fav but put them 5 points or less. Best of both worlds. You still get some points if the fav wins, you lose less points than almost everyone else in the comp if the underdog you like gets up.

1 to 7 point underdogs can be picked as much as you like, go with you gut on that. Just limit the damage on picking against the big favs.

 

[Exe Gesis]

You dont have to pick favs every week. Just dont pick 10+ point underdogs as often as you do to win.

A good way I find when I give a big underdog a chance of winning is still take the fav but put them 5 points or less. Best of both worlds. You still get some points if the fav wins, you lose less points than almost everyone else in the comp if the underdog you like gets up.

1 to 7 point underdogs can be picked as much as you like, go with you gut on that. Just limit the damage on picking against the big favs.

Gotta stop relying on the H-A system too. Last few years its no longer as prevalent, a sea-change occurring, more 50:50 even going 40:60. Fluid probably still.

Just go with the gut more and try to re-sort the CR more as per suggestion.

Or .... try to find a new model/system

 

[A11dAtP0w3R]

Gotta stop relying on the H-A system too. Last few years its no longer as prevalent, a sea-change occurring, more 50:50 even going 40:60. Fluid probably still.

Just go with the gut more and try to re-sort the CR more as per suggestion.

Or .... try to find a new model/system

Im not saying for a minute taking all favs is a winning formula dont get me wrong. Its just about being smart. Not resorting to desperate selections (massive underdogs) until its mathematically a requirement. Something ill probably have to do these next 3 weeks. Start taking some bigger risks in 9th spot.

 

[Exe Gesis]

Im not saying for a minute taking all favs is a winning formula dont get me wrong. Its just about being smart. Not resorting to desperate selections (massive underdogs) until its mathematically a requirement. Something ill probably have to do these next 3 weeks. Start taking some bigger risks in 9th spot.

There are AE guys who are every year consistently at the very top of the leaderboard every week, every year. Always in the top 1-10. Itd be interesting to know their secrets, their methods, if they use an actual system/model, which one, or if they just play it smart like you, where people are from their own mind making picks, not following a model telling them who to pick.

If anyone wants to share? Just for curiosity's sake. I personally wouldnt want to copy someone elses system. I like to use my own mind, or, devise my own system.

 

[A11dAtP0w3R]

A lot of it is just luck, dont read too far into it. im second in terms of overall picks with 142-81. Yet 9th in points.

I dont use any sort of model or system. Dont even look at the spreads honestly unless im having a bet on some games myself.

 

[Exe Gesis]

I find it highly improbable (not impossible) that no matter who you are, if you sat there using your own mind making picks ONLY, that you can always be consistently at the top every week every year. Or those ESPN overall leaderboards, where some people all year are getting max 1 or 2 wrong each week, and are like 100s ahead of the nearest person. No way can someone just miraculously know when to puck the raving underdogs one week and then the following week know not to pick any underdogs, etc. Able to constantly be 15-1 or 16-0 every week, riding thru those topsy-turvy weeks, never faltering. There has to be some kind of bot system used

 

[Exe Gesis]

We are mere mortals not computers. We are fallible to the unpredictable weeks. Someone like you using your mind only and being the best at 140-70 say. Might be the max for a person using their own mind. 2:1 ratio. And there are bad pickers who would be opposite 1:2 or 1:1. Just find it highly unlikely a human can achieve something like say 190-20 without bot/model assistance, and likewise, no way would a person ever have a 20-190 record using their own mind.

 

[Exe Gesis]

Not as drastic this year, see below, but ive seen it before, people with more of an improbable 170-190 correct total at this point of the season

 

[Exe Gesis]

Given how unusually unpredictable and tight this NFL season has been, a 160-50 is still indicative of a 180-30 during a more standard type of NFL season

 

[A11dAtP0w3R]

We are mere mortals not computers. We are fallible to the unpredictable weeks. Someone like you using your mind only and being the best at 140-70 say. Might be the max for a person using their own mind. 2:1 ratio. And there are bad pickers who would be opposite 1:2 or 1:1. Just find it highly unlikely a human can achieve something like say 190-20 without bot/model assistance, and likewise, no way would a person ever have a 20-190 record using their own mind.

Bots cant achieve that either. Bots are developed by humans after all, using stats humans see most reliable to predict results

 

[A11dAtP0w3R]

Show me a bot that can pick 190-20 in NFL games on a consistent basis. There is no way that is possible.

 

[Exe Gesis]

Show me a bot that can pick 190-20 in NFL games on a consistent basis. There is no way that is possible.

Apparently there are. Bing NFL, and some other one. There are systems out there from some boutique sites ( i dont know their names ) that have intricate math models and they advertise how theyre around 67% or higher success rate....people paying sub fees to use their model for gambling etc.

That Andy1 guy is hitting approx 80%. He had one bad week (10) where he scored 70.

 

[Exe Gesis]

That Andy1 guy is hitting approx 80%. He had one bad week (10) where he scored 70.

70 CR, which was 7-6 in terms of W-L

 

[A11dAtP0w3R]

Apparently there are. Bing NFL, and some other one. There are systems out there from some boutique sites ( i dont know their names ) that have intricate math models and they advertise how theyre around 67% or higher success rate....people paying sub fees to use their model for gambling etc.

That Andy1 guy is hitting approx 80%. He had one bad week (10) where he scored 70.

67% is a long way from the 190-20 @ 85% you suggested.

Besides, bots are mainly (almost always) developed for picking spreads. Spread picking is how the pros bet.

 

[Exe Gesis]

LicoriceAllsorts used to post his weekly selection model every weekly thread, remember? Dunno if that was his own or hes using some other boutique model, and tbh, i never even went back to see how well his pre-game system was doing. Maybe he can respond here. I think LittleG also used to post one? LA and someone else used to always anyway.

 

[A11dAtP0w3R]

Using Andy1 as proof is silly also GG. Its 1 season. He could be a s**t tipster who's never been this good in his life.

Need a bigger sample size of Andy1 to determine how good or bad he is.

 

[Exe Gesis]

How I Used 200 Experts and Reddit’s Comment Ranking Algorithm to Win My Office NFL Pick’em Pool

I find a disproportionate amount of joy in participating in my office’s NFL pick’em pool each year. Last year (2015–2016 NFL season)…

towardsdatascience.com

Microsofts AI bot Cortana is mentioned in that article from 2015

 

[Exe Gesis]

Using Andy1 as proof is silly also GG. Its 1 season. He could be a sh*t tipster who's never been this good in his life.

Need a bigger sample size of Andy1 to determine how good or bad he is.

Thats my point. No human could possibly be 80% without assistance from some kind of system/algorithm. Just as no human could possibly be the polar opposite bad getting only 20% correct. 45% to 65% would seem to be a rough outline of the worst to best imo -- picking from only your own mind.

 

[A11dAtP0w3R]

Thats my point. No human could possibly be 80% without assistance from some kind of system/algorithm. Just as no human could possibly be the polar opposite bad getting only 20% correct. 45% to 65% would seem to be a rough outline of the worst to best imo -- picking from only your own mind.

Human's could go 80% in a one off season easily. Cant do it consistently however. Just like no bot can. A bot just wont have as big of a gap between its best and worst results like a human can.

 

[A11dAtP0w3R]

Bot will hit say at 65% - 70% return consistently. While a human could vary between 50% to 80% but the majority of results are probably in the 55% to 60% ball park. Far less reliable.

Its impossible for a bot to consistently hit over 80%. Impossible. Anybody claiming one does is a liar and part of some sort of scam.

 

[Exe Gesis]

Bot will hit say at 65% - 70% return consistently. While a human could vary between 50% to 80% but the majority of results are probably in the 55% to 60% ball park. Far less reliable.

Its impossible for a bot to consistently hit over 80%. Impossible. Anybody claiming one does is a liar and part of some sort of scam.

Bots tho can process incredible amounts of data that humans cant. Able to correctly pick a huge upset based on historical data, predictive data, next gen type stats, collate it alongside other data like team win records in certain months, off bye weeks, when certain starters arent starting etc. A human could see some of those, but not all of them, and doesnt possess the calculation power of a computer to bring that all together and compute a result.

 

[A11dAtP0w3R]

Bots tho can process incredible amounts of data that humans cant. Able to correctly pick a huge upset based on historical data, predictive data, next gen type stats, collate it alongside other data like team win records in certain months, off bye weeks, when certain starters arent starting etc. A human could see some of those, but not all of them, and doesnt possess the calculation power of a computer to bring that all together and compute a result.

Im aware, there are too many human elements in games for any bot to go over 80% consistently is what im saying. Bad refs and coaching week to week, covid, team moral etc.

Stats can only get you so far. It isn't possible.

 

[A11dAtP0w3R]

Human's smash poker bots in challenge . good breakdown

 

[Exe Gesis]

Human's smash poker bots in challenge . good breakdown

Humans can be inspired, true